school leadership and educational …2)/2012(3.2-41).pdfschool leadership and educational practices...

ISSN-L: 2223-9553, ISSN: 2223-9944

Vol. 3, No. 2, September 2012 Academic Research International

www.journals.savap.org.pk

312

Copyright © 2012 SAVAP International

www.savap.org.pk

SCHOOL LEADERSHIP AND EDUCATIONAL PRACTICES

IN PAKISTAN

Safia Niazi Department of Teacher’s Education,

Federal Urdu University of Arts Science and Technology,

Karachi, PAKISTAN.

[email protected]

ABSTRACT

This research paper intends to understand the impact of leadership behaviors of principal with

teachers on collaborative learning. Four hypotheses were developed to examine staff’s

performance, differences and relationships. Two survey instruments LPI & SPSLC were used

to collect data. LPI was scored using seven point Liker Scale. The location of the study was

focused on 20 Government and 20 Private Schools of Karachi. Total score indicating a proper

distribution in the self-ratings of the school principals and learning needs of teachers. The

comparison data shows the level of mean differences among staff and heads which is greater

than the critical value. The co relational data indicates that dimensions 1 to 4 are significant

and negatively correlated; dimension 5 has no significance with any of the SPSLC descriptors.

Keywords: Leadership Behavior, Educational Leader, Professional Learning Communities,

Principal, Staff.

INTRODUCTION

A successful innovation is based on the collective and collaborative contribution of teaching staff as a

whole not the performance of individual teachers in the comparative separation of their own classes.

The educational system needs more concentration on single teacher role and other factors of equal

importance such as internal relationships, authority structures and the extent of the schools own

direction in dealing with such matters as finance and material resources as well. Argument here is that,

in the present analysis of problem solving capacity, the smallest organic unit e.g. school including

teaching staff and head, should be considered more effective element for progress.

The education system of Pakistan also required improvement in primary levels of school, to

upbringing a synonymous change with strengthening and for the benefit of creativity to deal with new

practices. The primary level of an education system i.e. school has the potential to approve, adjust,

create or decline the innovation.

In addressing, the issue of teaching staff and the impact of head’s leadership styles to improve their in service a practice, consideration of this study centered on professional development. But, there is a

lack of professionalism in our country. Our educators intentions does not comprise on missionary

spirit. In our country how many teachers and educators are passionate and devoted to the transmission

of knowledge and take it as the compulsory object of their life? They entered in teaching profession,

because they cannot be employed elsewhere or because the teaching line holds out better prospects for

them than any other profession.

A number of teachers are mostly low paid and in the existing economic depression, the woe fully

under paid ‘makers of the nation’ have often not been overcome to their financial issues. Their

underpaid career does not allow them to concentrate on teaching and to generate new ways out to

progress. Character building which is the basic aim of education cannot feasibly produced due to fiscal

circumstances.

TEACHER LEARNING IN PAKISTAN

“Learning from colleagues within the school has been recognized as an inestimable source for constant

professional growth”. (Fullan, 2001; Guskey, 2002; Retallick, 1999). From various studies conducted

both in the developed and developing countries, it is evident that in order to enhance student learning

outcomes, teachers needed to focus on their own learning. (Fullan, 2002; Hargreaves, 2003; Khalid &

Part-II: Educational Sciences

ISSN-L: 2223-9553, ISSN: 2223-9944

Vol. 3, No. 2, September 2012


www.savap.org.pk www.journals.savap.org.pk

313

Khan, 2006; Iqbal et al., 2005). Although there is enormous emphasis on teacher learning worldwide,

the scenario is most of the developing countries including Pakistan as remarked by various scholars

seems very discouraging. The reasons are several; one reason is that in the context of Pakistan, the

concept of teacher learning, as informed by literature is not very much appreciated (Farah, 1996).

If there are some efforts to start professional development programs, then Baez (1993), Jamil (1995),

Rizvi & Elliot (2005-07) assert that they are heavily theoretical in the real classroom situation. It

transpires that teachers can learn better in an environment where teaching and learning takes place, so

that they are able to practice and relate their learning to the contextual realities and adapt them

accordingly (Sarita & Tomar, 2004). Rizvi & Elliot (2005-07), Moller (2007) also emphasize that

learning takes place in a variety of context, including classrooms, schools and broadly-defined

communities.

METHODOLGY

This research involves a descriptive statistic study, exploring the existing achievements, attributes and

behavior. It describes the development of coordination analysis with the behavior of the head teachers

and the relationship among the variables of school professional learning communities. The data was

analyzed using two survey instruments: Leadership Practice Inventory (LPI) was structured for school

principals, based on thirty separate statements, refers five of the practices such as: Challenge the

process, Inspire a Shared Vision, Model the Way, Enable others to Act, Encourage the Heart, in the

explanation of the instrument. The statements were randomly placed within the context of the seven

point Liker’s Scale. The (SPSLC) School Professional Staff as a Learning Community will provide, an

understanding of teacher’s reflective perception on professional learning influenced by leadership

practice inventory. The statements describing teacher’s perceptions were coded using 17 descriptors of

five dimensions. The population of this study comprised of twenty government and twenty private

schools. This was a group study of teachers and principals practicing in schools of Karachi, city

district government schools were included.

From each school, one participating principal and one vice principal were asked to complete the (LPI)

as a self-observer and two participating school teachers were randomly selected to complete the

(SPSLS) questionnaire. These 40 schools provided a data of approximately 80 head teachers (P, VP)

and school teachers.

Statistical Procedure

The data from the LPI and the SPSLC will be evaluated using: descriptive statistics, including

frequency distribution, mean, median, standard deviation and analysis of variance for each school and

corresponding superintendent data. A person with a 2-tailed non-directional test will be used with the

LPI profile data and the SPSLC profile data by using Pearson’s correlation coefficient (i.e.,

relationship between two or more variables) across the dimensions of the leadership style of the school

superintendent and their respective schools with the teaching staff capability to become a professional

learning community.

FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

The findings of the study are presented as to each of the research questions presented in table 1.

Table 1. Research questions and the descriptors and dimensions used

Research Questions Descriptive / Dimensions used

How do school administrators perceive their

leadership style in the schools?

Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI)

Dimensions 1 – 5

How do school teachers perceive their reflection on

professional learning?

School professional staff as a learning community

(SPSLC) Dimensions 1 – 5

Descriptors 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, 2c, 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, 4a,

4b, 5a, 5b, 5c, 5d and 5e

ISSN-L: 2223-9553, ISSN: 2223-9944



314


www.savap.org.pk

How does teacher’s reflection on professional

learning differ by administrator’s leadership style?

School professional staff as a learning community

(SPSLC) dimension 1 – 5


4b, 5a, 5b, 5c, 5d, and 5e

What are the relationship between administrator’s

leadership style and teacher’s reflective perception

on professional learning?

Leadership Practice Inventory (LP I)

Dimension 1 – 5 school professional staff (SPSLC)

Dimension 1 – 5


4b, 5a, 5b, 5c, 5d, and 5e

Research Question 1

This research question was designed to survey the leadership practice of the principals to assess the

five major practices exemplified by leaders. Following findings were based on Six Level of Existence

in LPI results: Highly Exist (50-60), Strongly Exist (40-50), Mildly Exist (30-40), Exists but not

Express (20-30), Rarely Exist (10-20), Not Exist (0-10).

a) 66.25 % scored Highly Exists and 3.75 % scored Mildly Exists. It shows that majority

acknowledge LPI dimension 1 and admire the quality of challenging the process regarding the

intensive impact of leadership.

b) 60 % scored Highly Exists and 1.25 % scored Exist but Not Expressed. It shows that majority

acknowledge LPI dimension 2 and admire that the quality of shared vision in principals would

be inspired while positive change is required in system.

c) 86.25% scored Highly Exists and 13.75 % scored Strongly Exist. It shows that majority

acknowledge LPI dimension 3 and admire that the quality of enabling others to act play a

dynamic role for heads.

d) 77.5% scored Highly Exists and 1.25 % scored Mildly Exist. It shows that majority

acknowledge LPI dimension 4 and admire the quality of modeling the way in leader, to ascend

the standard of education system.

e) 82.5 % scored Highly Exists and 17.5 % scored Strongly Exist. It shows that majority

acknowledge LPI dimension 5 and admire the quality of encouraging the heart in leader

stimulates staff for creating interest and progress in profession.

This data intimate the existence of LPI dimensions. The high score of respondent occurs in LPI

dimension 3. It means the leadership style of enabling others to act really exists in Principals and has

great influence on teaching staff in order to enhance professional development.

Research Question 2

This questionnaire is consisting of 17 descriptors grouped in to five major dimensions of professional

learning communities.

Dimension 3 [Staff’s collective learning and application of the learning (taking decision) creates high

intellectual learning tasks and solutions to address student needs] received the highest rate in

Descriptor 3a, Collective Learning and Share Information (respondent=37, percentage 46.25%); Descriptor 3b, Consideration and Learning Issues of Staff (respondent=37, p. 46.25%); Descriptor 3c,

Teaching and Non-Teaching Issues (respondent=39, p 48.75%); Descriptor 3d, Improvement and

Implementation of Learning Staff (respondent=29, p 36.25%); Descriptor 3e, Assessment and

Revision of teaching Staff (respondent=38, p 47.5%) followed by Dimension 5, [School condition and

capacities support the staff’s arrangement as a professional learning organization], received rated with

Descriptor 5a, Arrangement of time for staff interacting (respondent=36, p 45%), Descriptor 5b,

School Condition and Capacity of structure (respondent=34, p 42.5%), Descriptor 5c, Staff’s

Communication and Trust (respondent=46, p 57.5%), Descriptor 5d, Positive Relationship Among

staff (respondent=45, p 56.25%), Descriptor 5e, Isolated and Collaborative Behavior (respondent= 39,

p 48.75%).

Dimension 2 [Staff shares vision for school improvement that have on undeviating focus on student

learning and are consistently referenced for the staff’s work] received rated with Descriptor 2a,


ISSN-L: 2223-9553, ISSN: 2223-9944




315

Positive and Shared Vision for staff (respondent=52, p 65%), Descriptor 2b, Positive Vision for

Learner (respondent=36, p 45%), Descriptor 2c, Positive Vision for Learning Process (respondent=33,

p 41.25%).

Dimension 1 [School administrator participate democratically with teachers sharing power, authority

and decision making] rated with Descriptor 1a, Autocratic Style (respondent=41, p 51.25%),

Descriptor 1b, Participatory Management (respondent=37, p 46.25%) and finally Dimension 4 [Peers

review and give feedback based on observing each other’s classroom behaviors in order to increase

individual and organizational capacity] rated with Descriptor 4a, Visit and Observation of Classroom

Teaching (respondent=36, p 45%), Descriptor 4b, Classroom Observation and Interaction of Learning

Staff (respondent=33, p 41.25%).

This data conjectures that Dimension 3 of the SPSLC questionnaire and Dimension 5 of the SPSLC

support research presented and literature on teacher’s professional development as influenced by

leadership practices. Score shows that Descriptors 3a, 3b,3c, 3d, 3e and 5a, 5b, 5c, 5d, 5e emphasis on

professional changing needs of our teachers as well as the learning needs of our students and the

developing influence of school restructuring need improvement to exist. A principal is considered to

be an ideal one if he encourages and admires his staff and take serious note of their recommendations

which will also help a leader to strengthen his grip over his position.

Research Question 3

Following table intends to compare whether teacher reflection on professional learning differ by

schools with administrators of different leadership styles.

Table 2. The one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the teacher’s reflection on professional

learning differ by administrator’s leadership style

ANOVA: Single Factor Α 0.05

SUMMARY

Groups Count Sum Average Variance

Strongly Agree 17 110 6.470588 6.264706

Agree 17 600 35.29412 56.34559

Neutral 17 58 3.411765 17.50735

Disagree 17 515 30.29412 36.47059

Strongly Disagree 17 74 4.352941 6.992647

ANOVA

Source of Variation SS Df MS F P-Value F crit

Between Groups 16345.6 4 4086.4 165.333 0.000 2.485885

Within Groups 1977.294 80 24.71618

Total 18322.89 84

Table 2 presents the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine, how teacher’s reflection on

professional learning differs by administrator leadership style. According to the data, average score

and variance of these groups are different as well. The Sum Square (SS) Between the Groups is 16345.6 and Mean Square (MS) is 4086.4 with the degree of freedom (Df = 4), where F is (165.333).

The Sum Square (SS) Within the Groups is 1977.294 and (MS) is 24.71618 with the (Df =80).

Calculated data shows that the F critical value i.e. 2.485885 is greater than the t critical value i.e.

1.990, with the significance level of 0.05 (from t-table {two tails}).

ISSN-L: 2223-9553, ISSN: 2223-9944



316


www.savap.org.pk

Research Question 4

Following mentioned tables shows the correlation data between the leadership dimensions of the

Leadership Practice Inventory taken by the administrators and the descriptors of the School Professional Staff as Learning Community.

Table 3. Correlation data between the leadership dimensions of the (LPI) taken by the administrator and

the descriptors of the (SPSLCS)

LPI DIMENSION SPSLC 1(A) SPSLC 1(B)

1 -0.57119** -0.53652**

2 -0.71913** -0.56089**

3 -0.3881** -0.80209**

4 -0.55229** -0.41499**

5 0.173429 -0.11626

Data shows correlation between LPI dimensions (1 to 5) and SPSLC descriptors (1a, 1b), using

Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient with significant level at p < 0.05, degree of freedom (df = 78).

Except 5 the LPI dimensions 1, 2, 3, and 4 are significant negatively correlated with SPSLC

descriptors 1a and 1b.



LPI DIMENSION SPSLC 2(A) SPSLC 2(B) SPSLC 2(C)

1 -0.44304** -0.57351** -0.41305**

2 -0.7608** -0.53371** -0.59389**

3 -0.34648** -0.65497** -0.58972**

4 -0.40854** -0.49857** -0.32213**

5 -0.04152 0.14126 -0.10396

Data shows correlation between LPI dimensions (1 to 5) and SPSLC descriptors (2a, 2b, 2c), using

Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient with significant level at p<0.05, degree of freedom (df = 78). Except

5 the LPI dimensions 1, 2, 3, and 4 are significant negatively correlated with SPSLC descriptors 2a, 2b

and 2c.



LPI Dimension SPSLC 3(A) SPSLC 3(B) SPSLC 3(C) SPSLC 3(D) SPSLC 3(E)

1 -0.44773** -0.65413** -0.65514** -0.12845 -0.67347**

2 -0.66155** -0.50703** -0.49402** -0.30336** -0.47674**

3 -0.50804** -0.8745** -0.82385** -0.49241** -0.80866**

4 -0.37999** -0.53745** -0.55282** -0.0259 -0.57921**

5 -0.04635 0.017403 0.099034 -0.15473 0.157358

Data shows correlation between LPI dimensions (1 to 5) and SPSLC descriptors (3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e),

using Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient with significant level at p<0.05, degree of freedom (df = 78).

The LPI dimensions 2 and 3 are significantly correlated with SPSLC descriptors 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d and 3e.

Except 5, dimension 1 and 4 is significant negatively correlated with 3a, 3b, 3c and 3e.


ISSN-L: 2223-9553, ISSN: 2223-9944




317



LPI DIMENSION SPSLC 4(A) SPSLC 4(B)

1 -0.58968** -0.593**

2 -0.60654** -0.63238**

3 -0.59805** -0.70212**

4 -0.52813** -0.5039**

5 0.145363 0.012999

Data shows correlation between LPI dimensions (1 to 5) and SPSLC descriptors (4a, 4b), using

Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient with significant level at p<0.05, degree of freedom (df = 78). Except

5 the LPI dimensions 1, 2, 3, and 4 are significant negatively correlated with SPSLC descriptors 4a

and 4b.



LPI Dimension SPSLC 5(A) SPSLC 5(B) SPSLC 5(C) SPSLC 5(D) SPSLC 5(E)

1 -0.64275** -0.4329** -0.53079** -0.52696** -0.55414**

2 -0.72715** -0.53119** -0.80099** -0.73252** -0.67382**

3 -0.6454** -0.63009** -0.33602** -0.46676** -0.58081**

4 -0.57154** -0.33898** -0.51216** -0.4797** -0.48666**

5 0.035141 -0.04242 0.045453 0.025998 0.033507

Data shows correlation between LPI dimensions (1 to 5) and SPSLC descriptors (5a, 5b, 5c, 5d, 5e),

using Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient with significant level at p<0.05, degree of freedom (df = 78).

Except 5 the LPI dimensions 1, 2, 3, and 4 are significant negatively correlated with SPSLC

descriptors 5a, 5b, 5c, 5d and 5e.

KEY FINDINGS

This section presents a summary of key findings of the study. Discussions that attempts to link the

findings with observed data.

1. Leadership is a key through which any system can be flourished and can make progress.

2. On the basis of collected data in correlation it is proved that a leader should be capable of

portraying his point of view clearly to others, making his thoughts worth considering for

others so he can come up with a good team to work with and enhances their professional

skills.

3. Co-relational coefficient outcomes shows, a successful leader should have professional skills

as well his personality must play an important role to make good impact on others.

4. A leader must be a good decision maker he should make right decisions on the right time in

order to make promising efforts for his institute.

5. A head teacher must be enthusiastic and should be capable of making his point of view clear

and considerable on both national and international level and also take great interest to solve

problems related to academic issues.

6. ANOVA represents that School professional staff as a learning community should focus on

student learning and share vision for school improvement.

7. Comparison of mean between SPSLC Descriptors indicates that, Staffs collective learning and application of the learning bring positive change and create high intellectual learning

tasks to recognize student needs.

ISSN-L: 2223-9553, ISSN: 2223-9944



318


www.savap.org.pk

8. Head teacher should be extremely professional in order to perform his duties in a more

professional ways, he must easily cope up with day to day changes coming in the society and

his knowledge should be updated in order to implement new strategies and methodologies to

introduce a healthy and professional educational system.

9. A good leadership not only motivates staff it also plays a dynamic role to create team spirit

among people working in a staff.

10. Above mentioned data shows a negative significant relationship between principal and staff

which emphasis that a mutual cooperation and understanding among teachers and principal

plays a vital role, to maintain a healthy environment to make the leader and staff work in a

united and more professional manner.

11. The educational institutions of Pakistan also required such leadership which must benefit the system to revise itself and its curriculum, teaching methods and management, results a good

team which will prove to be a healthy sign for the upcoming breed.

12. A negative significant relationship in data intends heads to possess the ability to ensure the

progress of the organization and the bright future. He/she must recognizes, what particular

style or set of behaviors are most appropriate in his leadership practice.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

1. It is valuable to repeat this study at provincial level with a larger population. The findings

and data may necessitate the Pakistan Educational Authorities to facilitate schools, colleges,

universities to improve professional learning skills for heads and staff as well.

2. Mix method research plays a dynamic role to enhance the vision of sample population.

3. Heads need to be aware of the fact that modified educational techniques can be taken in to

account, to ensure that curricular design, shared vision, participatory management

observation and school conditions and capacities support their professional practices.

4. It is further recommended that principals utilize their leadership style, using multimedia

technologies to moderate educational system.

CONCLUSION

Development and enhancement is not possible without the expertise and knowledge of the head.

During the collection of data, it has been observed that those principals who were cooperative and

enthusiastic there was a sign of enhancing the educational system in its school staff which was making

their environment unique their teachers were also satisfied but in so many other schools teachers were

found complaining about the fact the head do not involve them in making or taking any decision

regarding the managements or academics, the principal not even consider there advices to take any

progressive step he would rather prefer implementing his decisions on staff. The job of a principal is to

give such instructions through which the self-respect of the staff should also not get affected and

school also make progress.

Problems which act as a hurdle to enhance the standard of a school includes teachers who do not take

interest in co-curricular activities and avoid the staff meeting held by the head of department or the

leader, the dictatorial behavior of the principals and lack of positive resources available for teaching

aid which results lousiness and bizarre among the staff members. If a principal takes the responsibility

to solve all the above mentioned problems so it will automatically turns the staff towards working

sincerely and with more effort in there department or institution without any worry.

As a conclusion, a person who is capable of possessing all the above discussed aspects can prove to be

a good and successful instructional leader who plays an important role to enhance administrative

structure, management or professional development if it is in the form of teachers training program,

curriculum design and implementation, teaching techniques and methods, enhancing the school

culture, teachers principal relation, to take important decisions or adopting the new strategies and their

implementations. Professional learning community is a group of behavioral complexity and


ISSN-L: 2223-9553, ISSN: 2223-9944




319

implementation of policy and planning, for those administrations which has the ability of moving in to

a future with a broad perspective in mind, and ensuring the long term changes.

REFERENCES

Farrah, K. (2006). A journey in instructional leadership using the MCREL balanced leadership

framework as a vehicle: a beginning principal's efforts to grow in her instructional leadership.

Publisher University of Pennsylvania.

Fullan, M. and Hargreaves, A. (2000). Teacher Development and Educational Change. London: The

Flamer Press.

International Journal of Leadership in education: Theory and Practices, vol. 10, (3 July- Sep 2007),

pp. 272-75.

Iqbal, M. (2008). Understanding the Role of Principals in managing school discipline: A case study

unpublished dissertation, Aga Khan University, Institute for Educational Development

Karachi.

James, M., Kouzes, Barry, Z. Posner, (2007). The Leadership Challenge, Fourth Edition, Published by

Jossey- Bass A Wiley Imprint 989 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94103-1741—

www.josseybass.com

Khaki, J. (2005). Exploring Beliefs and Behaviors of Effective Head Teachers in Government Schools

in Pakistan, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Toronto Canada.

Kunwar, F.A. (2000). Secondary School Head Teacher’s Leadership Styles and their Implications for

school Improvement, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, American University, London, United

Kingdom.

Memon, M. Ali., Simkins.T., & Garrett, V. (2000). Understanding the Head Teacher’s role in Pakistan. Emerging roles, demands, constraints and choices, International studies in

Educational Administration.

Memon, M. (1998, 2000). In search of Effective School Leadership: Memon, M.Ali, N.Simkins.T and

Garrett, Understanding the Head Teacher Role in Pakistan: A case study Education.

Rizvi, M., and Elliot, B. (2005). Teachers Perception of their Professionalism in Government Primary

Schools in Karachi Pakistan, Asia- Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), pp. 35-32.

Pakistan Journal of Education, vol. 25, issue 1, (2008). AIOU Islamabad Pakistan, pp. 6-18.

Simkins, T., Sisum, C. and Memon, M. (2003). School Leadership in Pakistan: Exploring the Head

Teachers Role, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 74, pp. 275-291.

school leadership and educational …2)/2012(3.2-41).pdfschool leadership and educational practices...

Documents